Re: defining 'core' subversion (was Re: maintaining a list of svn: revprops)

On Sat, 19 Aug 2006, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> On 8/19/06, Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman@red-bean.com> wrote:
>> On 8/19/06, Eric Gillespie <epg@pretzelnet.org> wrote:
>>
>> > > Stuff in tools/ *is* in the main source tree, and is a supported part
>> > > of Subversion.
>> >
>> > make install still doesn't install them, right? That makes
>> > tools/ a ghetto. I feel the same way about the bindings.
>>
>> Ooh. Now that's an interesting criteria. I have to admit, the fact
>> that all the C-language svn* binaries get installed makes them feel
>> much more 'official' than anything in tools/.
>
> +1, if it gets installed via 'make install' it seems more "real" to me.
>

+1. That's almost always been my definition of "official".

--
David Wayne Summers        "Linux: Because reboots are for hardware upgrades!"
david_at_summersoft.fay.ar.us PGP Key: http://summersoft.fay.ar.us/~david/pgp.txt
PGP Key fingerprint =  0B44 B118 85CC F4EC 7021  1ED4 1516 5B78 E320 2001
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org